Under a DACA amnesty, American taxpayers would be left with a $26 billion bill. About one in five DACA illegal aliens, after an amnesty, would end up on food stamps, while at least one in seven would go on Medicaid. Since DACA’s inception under Obama, more than 2,100 illegal aliens have been kicked off the program after it was revealed that they were either criminals or gang members. JOHN BINDER

Black Lives Matter blames “white supremacy” for election of Trump

By Evan Blake and Barry Grey 30 November 2016

On November 15, Black Lives Matter Global Network released a statement on the election of Donald Trump that ignores the facts of the vote to present a false interpretation of American society as one dominated by racial hatred.

This racialist narrative goes hand in hand with the endorsement by the top leadership of Black Lives Matter of Democrat Hillary Clinton, whose campaign was based on a combination of personal attacks on Trump, anti-Russian propaganda and the promotion of racial and gender politics.

The statement is a semi-coherent collection of bald and unsubstantiated assertions, non-sequiturs and moralistic declarations. Even apart from its politically reactionary content, it has no intellectual substance and offers no perspective for achieving its stated goal, which is to “end all state-sanctioned violence until all Black Lives Matter.”

The statement is perhaps most remarkable for what it lacks. Names that do not appear include Obama, Clinton and Sanders. Also absent are the words “Democratic” and “Republican.” Other words not to be found include “capitalism,” “unemployment,” “inequality,” “poverty,” “working class,” or any reference to the social crisis in America.

Instead, the authors operate with the abstract and ahistorical terms associated with identity politics. Without citing any evidence, the statement asserts that a “white supremacist” was voted into office by an electorate opposed to “dismantling white supremacy.”

The statement begins by arguing that all of American history is to be interpreted from the standpoint of race and racism: “What is true today—and has been true since the seizure of this land—is that when black people and women build power, white people become resentful. Last week, that resentment manifested itself in the election of a white supremacist to the highest office in American government.”

Further on, the authors state, “We must reckon with the anti-blackness of America’s history that led to this political moment… White supremacy fortified the decision to disregard racism and sexism as serious variables in the outcome of this election.”

They continue: “In the months leading up to this election, we have demanded support from white people in dismantling white supremacy… We feel more than disappointed or angry—we feel betrayed.”

Black Lives Matter feels betrayed by “white people.” But the organization and the social layers for which it speaks, for all their denunciations of Trump, also see in his election a potential opportunity. They are prepared to accommodate themselves to the new regime so long as they get a cut of the spoils from Trump’s austerity policies.

In an interview with the online news site Quartz, published the very day Black Lives Matter issued its statement on Trump’s election, November 15, spokeswoman and co-founder Patrisse Cullors declared, “This is an opportunity to imagine a black future that we’ve never imagined before.”

The article on Quartz continued: “Ahead of Trump’s inaugural ceremony on Jan. 20, [Cullors] says African-Americans need to organize and decide on their requests for the first year… A new presidency brings sweeping changes to the political landscape, and is a chance to reconsider what’s possible.”

“Cullors wants to train 300 black leaders across the country to get on school boards, city councils, neighborhood councils, and ‘every branch of government,’” the article notes.

After claiming “It was white people who got Trump into office,” Cullors makes overtures to the ruling elite, saying, “There’s too much amazing work in the world that needs to be funded. White people with wealth need to be funding it.”

Evidently, the leaders of Black Lives Matter consider the $100 million awarded to the organization by the Ford Foundation to be a mere down payment from the corporate oligarchy. This is confirmed by the statement’s reiteration in its final paragraph of the organization’s demand for “reparations” for black people, the vast bulk of which would flow to the layers represented by Black Lives Matter.

The claim that American society is based on white supremacy, widely promoted by academics and purveyors of “critical race theory,” is radically at odds with reality. Black Lives Matter and similar organizations, as well as the various pseudo-left organizations that promote them, never provide a serious answer to a simple question: How could a white supremacist society elect an African-American as president—twice?

In fact, the American ruling elite has over a period of decades increasingly made use of the politics of race, gender and sexual orientation to divert attention from the fundamental class divide in society and the immense growth of economic inequality. It has, by means of programs such as affirmative action, promoted into political office, corporate administration and the media a privileged upper layer within the African-American and Latino populations and among women to defend the profit system and the capitalist state. The Democratic Party has become the political vehicle for this type of politics, even as it has repudiated social reform policies and linked itself more directly to Wall Street and the military/intelligence apparatus.

As a result, economic and social inequality within minority populations and among women has grown at a faster rate than within the population as a whole. It is for the more privileged layers of the African-American population, including current or aspiring academics, better-off professionals and entrepreneurs who are obsessed with advancing their own careers and economic and social status, that Black Lives Matter speaks. Its racialist program is directed toward obtaining a bigger cut for these layers of the income and wealth of the top 10 percent of society.

Trump openly promotes anti-immigrant chauvinism and anti-Muslim racism, and he made covert appeals to anti-black racism as part of his right-wing pseudo-populist campaign. He has ties, through figures such as his chief strategist Steve Bannon, to white supremacist elements. His election poses very real dangers to the working class. But it is false to say he ran as a white supremacist. Had he done so, ala David Duke, he could not have captured the Republican nomination, and in a general election he would have suffered a massive defeat.

The vast majority of workers and low-income people who voted for Trump were not voting for anti-black racism, war or authoritarianism. They voted for Trump to protest a political establishment in both big business parties that has presided over the devastation of jobs and living standards and a colossal growth of economic inequality. A breakdown of the vote shows that there was no “surge” of white working class votes for Trump, but rather a mass abstention in which the collapse in turnout among traditional Democratic voters—including black, Hispanic and young voters—predominated. (See: “Race, class and the election of Trump” and “The myth of the reactionary white working class”).

Numerous articles have been published in the establishment press documenting the fact that working class counties in key industrial states such as Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania that voted for the African-American Democratic candidate in 2008 and 2012 went for Trump in 2016, moving those states into the Republican column.

On the other hand, turnout and votes for Clinton among minority and young voters in cities such as Detroit, Cleveland and Milwaukee fell sharply from the totals registered for Obama in 2012.

Exit polls show that racial issues did not even register among the main concerns of voters. Overwhelmingly, the predominant issue was jobs and the economy. Clinton, who ran as the candidate of the status quo and the continuator of Obama’s legacy, was punished by voters who continued to suffer economically and socially during the two terms of the candidate of “hope” and “change.”

Black Lives Matters’ analysis is not only false and politically reactionary, it is intellectually vacuous. It is full of empty abstractions and moralistic phrases. Thus, the statement on Trump declares: “We’ve asked white people to organize their communities, to courageously help their loved ones understand the importance of solidarity and to show up for us, for themselves and democracy.”

It offers on this basis no coherent or viable strategy to oppose racism, the increased repression and police violence that is certain to come with the installation of Trump in the White House, let alone the intensification of austerity and social cuts. The authors write: “But we ask ourselves—how do we reconcile our vision for future generations’ prosperity with the knowledge that more than half of white voting Americans believe a white supremacist can and should decide what’s best for this country?”

By way of a reply, all they can muster is: “We organize… Civic engagement is one way to engage democracy and our lives don’t revolve around election cycles…We continue to operate from a place of love for our people and a deep yearning for real freedom.”

In other words, moral appeals combined with support for the existing economic and political system in general, and the Democratic Party in particular.

Black Lives Matter is incapable of identifying any objective basis for the unification of working people and youth of all races. In fact, it opposes such a struggle, because it defends the capitalist status quo.

Racial politics have been used throughout American history as a weapon by the ruling class to divide and demobilize the working class to prevent a unified struggle to overthrow capitalism. Today, Black Lives Matter plays a significant and reactionary role in this strategy of divide-and-rule.

Black Abortion ‘Reported’ in 2013: 128,682 Babies Killed, 35% of Total: (CNSNews.com) – Although black Americans make up 13.3% of the U.S. population, they comprised 35% of the total abortions “reported” – 128,682 babies killed -- in 2013, according to the latest Abortion Surveillance report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

An army of law enforcement officers led by Torrance police arrested 13 reputed South Los Angeles gang members Friday in a massive pre-dawn operation to break up an organized ring believed responsible for some 5,000 residential burglaries in five Southern California counties.

Of the 702 people shot to death by police this year, according to a database maintained by the Washington Post, 163 were black men, about 23 percent of the total. Whites made up roughly half the victims, while Hispanics, Native Americans, Asians, black women and people of mixed race made up the balance.

“America’s Got Talent” host Nick Cannon told a New York City radio station recently that Planned Parenthood – the nation’s largest abortion provider – has been committing “real genocide” against blacks.

“Think about all the stuff they did with Planned Parenthood and all of that type of stuff. That’s—that type of stuff is to take our community, and forget gentrification, it’s real genocide, and it’s been like that for years,” Cannon said in an interview on Nov. 17 with “The Breakfast Club” morning show, heard on Power 105.1 in New York City.

Trump refuses to sever ties with his business empire

By E.P. Milligan 30 November 2016

US President-elect Donald Trump has made clear that he will not sever ties with his vast business empire upon assuming office. The decision underscores the authoritarian and corrupt character of the incoming government and its open contempt for democratic norms.

While some media outlets have published articles worrying about the legal implications of a government with manifold and open conflicts of interest, the Democratic Party has been virtually silent on the question. This is in keeping with its effort to legitimize an administration headed by an ultra-right billionaire, who lost the popular vote by a substantial margin, and to make the transition from Obama to Trump as seamless as possible.

In defending his decision, Trump recently declared, “As far as the potential conflict of interests, the law is totally on my side, meaning, the president can’t have a conflict of interest.”

From a legal and constitutional standpoint, this assertion is clearly false. The Emoluments Clause (Article I, Section 9, Clause 8) of the US Constitution bars any person holding office in the US government from receiving any sort of present, salary, fee or profit from a foreign state.

Trump has business interests in real estate, management and branding in no less than 18 foreign countries, spanning virtually the entire globe. They are: Canada, Brazil, Uruguay, Panama, Bermuda, French Antilles, Scotland, Ireland, Turkey, Azerbaijan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Israel, South Africa, Indonesia, India and China. He is currently attempting to expand into Argentina. Over the course of his 16-month election campaign, Trump registered eight new companies based in Saudi Arabia.

The president-elect claims he will form a blind trust, an arrangement whereby the management of his holdings would be turned over to a trustee with whom he had no contact. But he insists on naming his three adult children, all of whom are involved in his transition team, as the trustees, making a mockery of his supposed adherence to legal and democratic norms.

Among the most obvious conflicts of interest arising from Trump’s business ventures and the political power he will wield as president are the following:

* Trump owns shares of stock in companies involved in the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline, which is being opposed by Native American tribes and hundreds of supporters who have been protesting for months in the face of brutal police repression. Trump owns between $15,000 and $50,000 in stock in Energy Transfer Partners, the company building the pipeline, and holds between $100,000 and $250,000 in Phillips 66, which owns a one-quarter share of the pipeline.

* The Trump International Hotel, which opened in October in Washington, DC, is housed in a building leased by Trump from the federal government’s General Services Administration. As president, Trump will have the power to appoint the GSA’s next administrator. The hotel has already begun catering to foreign diplomats on official state business.

• Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte appointed a longtime business associate of Trump as a special envoy to the United States in late October.

• Trump’s golf course in Turnberry, Scotland opened during his election campaign. He has since encouraged UK Independence Party (UKIP) leader Nigel Farage to oppose the construction of offshore wind farms that would affect the coastal views at the golf resort.

It is already clear from Trump’s actions and those of his transition team members that he has no intention of avoiding conflicts of interest. Though he claims that his children will take no part in his administration, he appears to already have requested security clearances not only for his children, but also for his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who owns a real estate company as well as the New York Observer.

His children have already been present in meetings between Trump and foreign leaders. Ivanka participated in a meeting between her father and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on November 17 as well as in a phone call with Argentine President Mauricio Macri on November 14. Argentine journalist Jorge Lanata has alleged that the president elect’s first call with Macri included a discussion about circumventing permit requirements that are delaying the construction of a Trump-brand office building in Buenos Aires. Both Ivanka and Eric appeared with Mr. Trump at a meeting with three of the family’s Indian business associates in New York on November 15.

Trump, the personification of the backwardness and criminality of the American financial aristocracy, has an extensive history of corrupt business practices. From the 1970s on, he has been at the center of scandal after scandal:

* He was charged with housing discrimination on the basis of “race and color” at 39 sites around New York in the 1970s. He was caught bullying tenants at various buildings he was attempting to convert into luxury apartments and condos in the 1980s.

• He is alleged to have links to mafia figures, including Robert LiButti, John Gotti's right-hand man, who was a preferred customer at Trump’s Atlantic City casino up until 1991.

• He is notorious for hyper-exploitation of undocumented Polish immigrants on a building site in New York City. The workers were paid $5 an hour, with numerous cases of alleged wage theft. They were forced to sleep at the construction site. If they raised the question of back pay with management, they were threatened with deportation.

• Trump ventures have been cited for violations of casino laws, including one instance where his father bought 700 chips worth a total of $3.5 million with no intention of gambling. The purchase, serving essentially as an illegal loan, helped Trump pay off the casino’s debt.

• He has been cited for anti-trust violations, including one case in 1986 when he attempted to carry out a hostile takeover of two rival casinos, Holiday and Bally.

• He is known for allegedly refusing to pay contractors, waiters, dishwashers and plumbers in hundreds of cases over the course of three decades.

• On November 18, ten days after the election, it was reported that Trump had agreed to pay $25 million to settle two class action law suits and a third suit brought by the New York State Attorney General’s Office charging illegal and fraudulent business practices in connection with his for-profit Trump University, which operated from 2005 to 2010. The “university” was essentially a pyramid-scheme consisting of a series of “seminars” that claimed to teach his real estate business secrets. Students paid as much as $35,000 for the classes, only to find that many of the instructors were totally unqualified.

* Trump may have avoided paying income tax for nearly two decades by exploiting a legal loophole. His tax returns in 1995 reported a $916 million loss (three years after his second bankruptcy), a number so high that it legally exempted him from income tax for 18 years. He has refused to release his tax returns to the public.

* The Donald J. Trump Foundation admitted in IRS filings that it broke federal rules against “self-dealing,” a provision intended to prevent charitable organizations from using funds to help their leaders’ families or business interests. Trump was fond of using the foundation’s funds to settle his legal disputes. He appears to have spent some $260,000 in foundation funds on legal battles. The foundation reportedly also bought high-priced luxury items only to gift them to Trump.

The FDIC paid OneWest $1 billion, which Stein said went to “billionaire investors … to cover the close of foreclosing on working class, everyday American folks.”

“But the bank came under fire for its foreclosure practices as housing advocacy groups accused it of being too quick to foreclose on struggling homeowners. In 2011, dozens of demonstrators descended on Mnuchin's $26.5 million home in he wealthy Bel Air neighborhood to protest OneWest's eviction tactics, according to the Los Angeles Times.”

"Trump
is not the initiator of this class war against working people. It has been
underway for decades, beginning in earnest with the election of
Ronald Reagan in 1980 and continuing under every
succeeding administration, including the eight-year tenures of
Democrats Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. The colossal redistribution of
wealth and income from the bottom to the top of American society reached
record proportions under Obama, whose legacy of falling
living standards and worsening economic crisis for tens of millions
of workers was a decisive factor in the victory of the fascistic demagogue
and con artist Trump."

The FDIC paid OneWest $1 billion, which Stein said
went to “billionaire investors … to cover the close of foreclosing on
working class, everyday American folks.”

“But the bank came under fire for its foreclosure practices as housing
advocacy groups accused it of being too quick to foreclose on struggling
homeowners. In 2011, dozens of demonstrators descended on Mnuchin's $26.5
million home in he wealthy Bel Air neighborhood to protest OneWest's eviction
tactics, according to the Los Angeles Times.”

“But the bank came under fire for its foreclosure practices as housing
advocacy groups accused it of being too quick to foreclose on struggling
homeowners. In 2011, dozens of demonstrators descended on Mnuchin's $26.5
million home in the wealthy Bel Air neighborhood to protest OneWest's eviction
tactics, according to the Los Angeles Times.”

MUSLIM: THE GREAT FORNICATOR MOHAMMED’S CULT OF
DEATH, HATE AND STEALING

ISIS to Yazidi Girls: ‘Once We Rape You, You Will Be Muslim’

The Islamic State wants to torture and destroy the Yazidi people, wipe "them off the face of the Earth," said lawyer and humanitarian Jacqueline Isaac, who added that the jihadists try to force Yazidi girls to convert to Islam and, if they refuse, tell them this is pointless because once they rape them, which they do, they become Muslim.

"[I]t is a philosophy to destroy them and to torture them," said Isaac in testimony before the House Foreign Affairs Committee[1] in May 2015 -- testimony that was not covered by the major U.S. news networks ABC, CBS and NBC, according to a search of the Nexis news database.

"With the girls particularly that I met, they in one night – because they felt safe in Sinjar town [in Iraq] – one night ISIS came and took all of these girls," said Isaac. "They told them first, they gave them an option: Will you become a Muslim? Will you convert to Islam? Many of them said ‘no.’"

"And they told them, ‘You are going to be Muslim regardless because we are going to sleep with you,'" said Isaac. "'And the moment we do that, once we rape you, you will be Muslim.’"

Isaac, vice president of the humanitarian group Roads of Success[2], traveled to Iraq and Syria and met with many of the victims of the Islamic State, particularly Yazidi women and girls who had been sold into sex-slavery by the Islamists and who later managed to escape.

At the hearing, Chariman Ed Royce (R-Calif.) asked Isaac, “How extensively has ISIS been involved in what we here call sex trafficking, or slavery frankly, particularly the kidnapping and sale of women and girls from these overrun communities? Has it been an outcome of lawlessness or is it part of a more deliberate ISIS policy to destroy and to subjugate those who do not share their fanaticism?”

“We
must stop all Muslim immigration because, in the end, those Muslims all intend
to dominate and overrun our country. We need to stop this “oligarchy” by our
votes.” FROSTY WOOLDRIDGE

BILL CLINTON
SUCKS IN BRIBES FROM ISIS DONORS!

The Muslim Sheikhdom Qatar is a
major sponsor of ISIS and global anti-American terrorism. How disturbing is it
that Bill Clinton sucked in a bribe of ONE MILLION DOLLARS under the guise of a
birthday gift? There is NO one the Clintons will not sell us out to and have
already!

“What we're seeing is our Congress and national leadership dismantling our laws by not enforcing them. Lawlessness becomes the norm, just like Third World corruption. Illegal aliens now have more rights and privileges than Americans. If you are an illegal alien, you can drive a car without a driver's license or insurance. You may obtain medical care without paying. You may work without paying taxes. Your children enjoy free education at the expense of taxpaying Americans.” http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2011/05/feds-allow-illegal-aliens-to-cross.htm

Abbott was responding to a Twitter user who questioned whether the Texas governor could do anything to reverse Austin's pledge to remain a sanctuary city.

During his presidential campaign, President-elect Donald Trumppledged to deport millions of immigrants.

He said during an interview shortly after his victory he would prioritize deporting or jailing any undocumented immigrants who were members of gangs or had criminal records.

He also vowed during the campaign to block federal dollars from cities that give sanctuary to undocumented immigrants.

Democratic governors and mayors signaled earlier this month that they will not go along with the Trump administration's plans.

Not quite a withering broadside, more like a shot across the bow. Sanctuary cities are going to fight tooth and nail in the courts to maintain their status as a safe haven for illegals. The problem for Abbott and Trump is that local and state authorities are under no legal obligation to enforce federal immigration statutes. The courts have said if the feds want to enforce strict immigration policies, they must do it themselves.

In the past, the federal government, citing insufficient resources, allowed states and cities to determine their own policies toward illegals. That may change as Donald Trump has promised to expand immigration enforcement resources. But non-cooperation might still throw a monkey wrench into Trump's and Abbott's plans.

If the feds were to capture some illegal aliens in a sanctuary city, where would they detain them? The city can't be forced to make space in their jails for federal prisoners. Nor can the cops be required to assist federal efforts in any way.

These are the sorts of actions that sanctuary cities and states will use to thwart Donald Trump. The whole mess is going to end up going to the Supreme Court where it is hoped a conservative majority will finally put an end to this defiance.

JAMES
WALSH
- THE HISPANICAZATION of AMERICA

“The watchdogs at Judicial Watch
discovered documents that reveal how the Obama administration's close
coordination with the Mexican government entices Mexicans to hop over the fence
and on to the American dole.” Washington
Times

OPEN BORDERS: The Democrat
Party’s Weapon of Mass Destruction on the American Worker

SANTA ANA SURRENDERS TO LA RAZA FASCIST MOVEMENT

Another California City Waves the Mexican Flag

Amnesty plan would cost
taxpayers $1.2 trillion

Hillary Clinton's plan to bring 11 million illegal aliens
"out of the shadows" would cost American households an immediate
tax increase of $1.2 trillion, or $15,000 per household, according to a study
by the National Academy of Sciences.

FROSTY WOOLDRIDGE:

MEXICO’S STAGGERING LOOTING IN OUR OPEN BORDERS….

Here did those vehicles go? Who stole them? Take a guess. Arizona is the
temporary home of 500,000 illegal aliens. They cost Arizona taxpayers over $1
billion annually in services for schools, medical care, welfare anchor babies,
loss of tax base and prisons. Illegals use those vehicles for smuggling more
people and drugs from around the world into our country. When the vehicles are
recovered, they are smashed-up wrecks in the desert. If not found, they have
new owners south of the border as thieves drive the cars through the desert and
into Mexico as easily as you drive your kids to soccer practice. THAT’S how
porous our borders are!